Exactly, and everything is going as it should (as unusual as this situation is) despite what appears to be concerns on your part.
The Liberals as the incumbent government have the right to face the legislature. Had the vote been
41 NDP
33 Liberals
13 Greens
the Liberals would have had every right to strike a deal with the Greens, select a speaker, introduce a Throne Speech, survive a non-confidence vote and stay in power despite being the party in second place. Look up the the 1925 Canadian election as an example.
The NDP and the Greens have struck a deal ahead of time, letting the Liberals know the outcome of a non-confidence vote. If the Liberals want to introduce a Throne Speech that includes every possible Green wishlist item and watch them squirm while voting it down, then they can do so. Everybody would see through that sham but they can do it if they want.
As to your concerns about convention involving the speaker. It is just convention. And I doubt that this situation has ever occurred in BC so it is convention from other parliamentary democracies. I am not even sure how often a speaker has been placed in a position to break a tie in a non-confidence vote, especially when belonging to the opposition party. This situation is so rare convention may not have a whole lot of precedence.
As to the politicizing of the position of speaker. As soon as the Liberals decide that nobody from that party will put their name forward, they are not only breaking with convention (the speaker usually comes from the governing party) but they are doing so for political reasons. They are setting the precedent for the breaking of convention and the politicizing of the position. Don’t blame the NDP or Greens.
The Lieutenant Governor can decide that an election should be called instead but given the NDP/Green agreement and an election barely a month old, that would be highly unusual. Parliament should be given a chance to find a workable government.
As much as you hate the thought of an NDP government supported by the Green party, that is exactly what is going to happen and we will see how long it lasts. For me, this situation gives me more faith in the democratic process than an NDP majority would have. Minority governments make everybody more accountable.
“The general approach to this is that the party wishing to govern, which is generally the party with the most seats in the House would select from among its members someone to sit as speaker… So that’s the general rule and we’ll see what takes place,” de Jong said, adding at the end of the day “there will be a speaker in the chair.”
“In so far as we have recalled the House and will have a cabinet sworn-in, I think that rule applies to us as it would to a new government.”
Utterly shameless.
I think I’ll call into the next radio show and say I didn’t vote Liberal to support welfare bums and pay for other people’s babysitters, I’m gonna vote Conservative.
Future I predict will see the Liberals defeated with a non confidence vote and in 6 to 12 months I see the same thing happening to the NDP and an election to follow.
Given my now phenomenal ability to predict the future (1 for 1 by my count) I shall make another. The NDP/Green agreement will last four years. The Greens have agreed to support the NDP on any confidence vote but are free to vote down any legislation that is not considered a confidence vote (generally throne speeches and budgets). The NDP would have to do something outrageous (which isn’t totally far fetched) for the Greens to renege on that agreement. Other than somebody from the NDP or the Greens quitting or retiring or dying or crossing the floor (all possibilities but equally possible from the Liberals as well) there is no reason to think it can’t last.
Of course, if GrantG agrees with me then all bets are off.
I must admit DWhite that you do have some ability to predict the future.
Just wondering if I can get some credit for the outlandish statement in reference to Andy Borowitz that was used to begin this thread. After all it was the success of both NDP and Green Party candidates getting people to think in alternate ways (thought experiments, mind control?) that has caused Ms. Clark and the provincial Liberals to change their ways….
Wow. Just made my first visit to Rupert in 21 years. Now I understand some of your desperation for LNG. Has it ever run down…
the tourist areas are still great, had a nice time in Cow Bay and dinner at Dolly’s, but shit man the downtown core… yukk. I had no idea you’ve been economically shit kicked like the rest of the Hwy16 corridor.
In the FOrt over 13 of the businesses and over 1/2 the restaurants are gone in the last 20 years, but there was a major downtown revitalization of frontage, facias, signage etc. it actually looks better than it did 20 year ago. Almost all the old once there was no chance of new tenants so they’re torn down and gone. Can’t say the same in Rupert. OMG even some of the nicer hotels look decayed and flaking.
It doesn’t matter who we vote for up here. Really, there’s bugger all a MLA or even a gov’t can do. We need to get heads together for a rethink - 100 pipelines and LNG terminals won’t employ as many as one big sawmill ever did. I don’t have an answer, but many heads thinking might come up with something.
I wrote this story last year…Here’s another writer…
The day of the Woodfibre Squamish presser I wrote it was bullshit…seems I was right…Just as i was with Petronas…Altagas…ShellCanada LNG…Chevron(douglas channel LNG…Steelhead LNG…Quicksilver LNG…and the rest…
Need more…Financial Post article…Now, the FP article the writer is a rightwing corporate CAPP propagandist…ignore her…Read what one of the head guys at Cheniere Energy(Gulf coast, louisiana) has to say about a LNG pipeline to the coast.
"I guarantee you I can land that (Western Canadian) AECO gas in the Gulf Coast cheaper than they can move that AECO gas to the West Coast,” Cheniere chief commercial officer Anatol Feygin told reporters.
Feygin said that producers in Western Canada require a $7 billion pipeline to get their gas to the West Coast, which “is going to be nightmarish for them to build, and fantastically expensive,” he told reporters.
Looks like I was correct on LNG…and as for the throne speech…on a blogcast with Canadian Glen a month ago…https://twitter.com/canadianglen
I told of the “throne speech”…loaded with everything…but I added this to my commentary…“throne speeches don’t have to be true”…that conversation is here
…I cmon about the 28 minute mark minute mark…It’s a great conversation…and again…I was 100% accurate.
here was my previous blogcast…100% ACCURATE
And perhaps you might like these articles…
one more…
Selling Cynical…A Christy Clark Portrait…Written well before Clark’s triple gainer backflipping triple twist throne speech bellyflop…
To all all those Liberal supporters who insistently suggested that voters on the north coast were wasting their votes by voting for parties that were not part of the provincial reigning party. Thanks for all the cajoling: this time I finally did vote for the party in power - it is a nice feeling isn’t it. (Although it may be fleeting I’ll admit I feel so self important now: blush:)
Can we finally say the May election has drawn to a close? Or is there more to come?
